Bibliographic record
Abstract
The introduction of the American physician assistant/associate (PA) was predicated on the belief that the nation's health care needs had outpaced the supply of physicians. The notion that the medical experience of veterans could be utilized in the civilian sector was at the forefront of discussion. From 1965 to the third decade of the new century, the PA has become established in this role and has become an integrated part of society. As of 2021, more than 125,000 PAs are in clinical practice; most (76%) are female, with a mean age of 41 years. PAs work in 65 distinct areas of medicine and surgery, with a quarter in the primary care disciplines. The most visible practice settings are family medicine, surgical subspecialities, emergency medicine, and orthopedics. Sites of PA employment include primary care offices, emergency departments, and inpatient settings. PAs work as hospitalists and intensivists, with some skilled in cardiac catheterization and traumatology. Increasingly, PAs are utilized in graduate medical education, supporting the continuity of care across hospital teaching wards. In a wide range of studies, the evidence demonstrates that PAs produce care indistinguishable from that of a physician in general medicine. When care by PAs for patients with complex and chronic diseases is compared with physician care, the outcomes are the same but the labor cost is considerably lower. The economics of PAs favor their employment, and patient satisfaction is the same as that with doctors. In 2021, at least 11,000 PAs graduated from 277 accredited programs. This graduation rate is increasing, with 20 more programs in development. Predictive modeling by the Bureau of Labor Statistics suggests that the employment growth of PAs will continue beyond 2030.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".